December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Forwarded mail...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 21:42:39 +0200 (MET DST) > From: nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) > Subject: Re: "Show me an example of terrorists using the Internet or crypto" > You are also not considering the case where one person has a gun and > another does not. The situation is more stable if both people are > armed. (And don't claim you are talking about disarming a whole > society. You aren't, just part of it.) Why is the situation more stable if both parties are armed? If I were confronted by a armed burglar and we were facing off I would pull the trigger as soon as I got a lock. If their gun wasn't in a ready position I would warn them and if they so much as flinched I'd drop them. If they were unarmed I might beat them senseless with the gun but I would not shoot them unless they made a motion to rush me, then I would go for a non-lethal shot unless the distance was less than a dozen feet (rushing distance) or so in which case I prefer head shots followed by center-torso (heart) shots. I'd also train to fire 3 shot groups. The one exception would be center-torso shots if they were wearing heavy or bulky clothing that might hide a vest. In that situation (assuming it wasn't a rush) I would shoot for the inside of the thigh at the hip-joint. Hit that artery and your dead without immediate medical attention (which I am not likely to give after just shooting the SOB). If it was a rush situation I would dump the clip into their chest moving upward, hoping the KE would slow them down enough to get a clear head shot (this would be what I practiced the most as well). No, despite your claim the most stable situation is to not have the invasion in the first place, followed by the victim being the only one armed. Anything else is a gun-battle waiting for a twitch. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes: > Are the posters in this thread unwilling to criticize C2Net's StrongHold > because they're afraid to get obnoxious threatening letters from Sameer > Parekh's shysters? Those who are newcomers to the list should know that Vulis has never presented any evidence substantiating his vague claims that Stronghold is insecure or has backdoors (or whatever the claims were). Vulis is conducting a personal vendetta against one of C2Net's staff members and anyone who happened to be or become associated with him.

2 1

Re: None (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: None > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 97 16:15:50 EDT > > Those who are newcomers to the list should know that Vulis has never > > presented any evidence substantiating his vague claims that Stronghold > > is insecure or has backdoors (or whatever the claims were). Vulis is > > conducting a personal vendetta against one of C2Net's staff members and > > anyone who happened to be or become associated with him. > > Nor do I have to present any evidence. I'm not the one selling StrongHold. Exactly, StrongHold is the one making the claims of security, it behooves them to address any and all criticisms of their product. > I have received several threatening communications from C2Net's lawyers, > which were discussed at length on this list. To avoid unpleasant disputes > I agreed not to disseminate my opinions about StrongHold. > Please keep this in mind if you consider buying it. Which is sufficient reason not to use the StrongHold product or anything else put out by them. Any company which desires to suppress opinions or discussion over their product clearly has something to hide. This is what I tell my customers and they seem to understand the utility of such an approach. Never support strong-arm tactics, honest people don't need them. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Traffic Analysis and Cover Traffic (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 09:33:13 -0700 > From: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> > Subject: Traffic Analysis and Cover Traffic > As I understand your example above, the sender becomes less identifiable > because he can always be counted on to send some packets; an attacker > cannot see a message after a long period of no messages and correlate it to > a similar sudden increase of activity at a possible recipient machine. > > Traffic analysis is something you should look at. And think about. This holds if it is a one-time occurance. If Mallet is looking at the traffic over a very long time it is completely reasonable to expect some correlation to become clear. To address the example another presented about some book example of burst analysis. Look at real-world examples such as the underground in France in WWII. They would generate a single message on a known frequency at a specific time. Thus interested parties could dial-in and get the info but would not provide the Nazi's with sufficient traffic or time to get a bearing. The revolutionaries in the book are amateurs and deserve what they get since it is clear they are incompentent and by extension not fit to run a country. Anyone with a clue will use times single instance transmissions and if available burst or SS transmitters to reduce the transmission time even more. With current technology like full-time satellite surveillance and transmitter characteristic analysis anything more than a single burst transmission with the radio from a random location will provide sufficient traffic to get a fix. You should also throw the transmitter away or change the drivers in the finals after each use as characteristic analysis will provide Mallet with the means to track the transmitter and thereby apply traffic analysis (just like they use in some cell systems). ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: "Show me an example of terrorists using the Internet or crypto"
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Alex Le Heux wrote: >Maybe you haven't noticed, but seen on 2000 year scales, the entire >world is constantly in a state of war. Europe isn't special in that >regard. I guess the conclusion, then, is that gun control is bad for the whole world, not just Europe. >And even if I had my AR15 then, it wouldn't help me a lot against >guided missiles and mortar fire. It's harder to police a hostile population which is well armed. >And anyway, "to defend yourself in a war" is not one of the usual >arguments against gun control. The popularity of an argument can be independent of its worth. "To defend yourself in general" is commonly used. War, oppressive government, and political turbulence are the most likely situations in which people need their weapons, even in the United States. >> You must be getting some good drugs over there to conjure up this >> fantasy land where everyone loves one another and would never think >> of killing someone because it sure as hell doesn't exist in Europe. > >Well, we're a lot closer to it over here than you guys are over >there. You mean like the former Yugoslavia? Or do you mean like the parts of Europe where people are not slaughtering each other at the moment? I have to confess that I am surprised at the level of resentment among the members of various Europeans countries feel towards other European countries. For example, the Germans don't like the Dutch because when they visit they are treated badly by, among others, the police. The Dutch don't like the Germans because, well, they got to know them a little too well in the 1940s and they are nursing the grudge. With that sort of situation, anything can happen and it can happen quickly, even if things seem mellow right now. And these little resentments and jealousies are felt between far more groups in Europe than just between the Dutchies and the Germans. Let's also take a look at the Dutch performance during their occupation. While there certainly were many courageous Dutch people who helped refugees (at great personal risk, to say the least), and there were many courageous Dutch people who were in the resistance, there were also many Dutch people who did not perform so well. Not only were a large number of Jewish people turned in by Dutch informers, but there were even Dutch SS units. I basically think well of the Netherlands and its people, but it is important to recognize that certain unpleasant characteristics exist in a large portion of the population of even a nice country. It is unlucky to pretend that these characteristics can never be expressed. Let's turn to the Western Hemisphere: El Salvador. During much of the 1980s, the U.S. government supported groups of people in El Salvador who were sending out death squads to murder their suspected opponents. The U.S. certainly acquiesced in this activity - of this there is no doubt. But, it is not unlikely the U.S. was more directly involved. (Only fifteen years earlier the U.S. was doing the same thing in Vietnam.) What would have happened if the citizens of El Salvador were adequately armed? One thing you wouldn't see is a death squad going into a neighborhood to kick down some innocent's door and murder him or his family. At least, you wouldn't see it twice. Likewise, when the communist guerrillas were forcing (maybe) the peasantry to support them, the peasants would have no need to cooperate unwillingly if they were well armed. People who are well armed are less likely to become pawns, victims, or slaves. That is desirable. Incidentally, the consistent support the U.S. government has shown for murderous or even genocidal governments is of great concern to those of us who live in the U.S. It is unlikely that these tactics won't be used here were there a serious political struggle and a disarmed population. An issue that might possibly blossom into such a political struggle is mass surveillance. While the mass media is, for the most part, giving everything the government's spin, and while large numbers of Congressmen and other denizens of Washington, D.C. think it's a good idea, the bulk of the population is not happy about this at all. They can read the writing on the wall. The potential for conflict between the political class, which has a long history of murder and even assassination, and the American people exists right now. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNDKo45aWtjSmRH/5AQG/KAf/ViGabpr8OnP2UYZ/CZAKQ4czRzVlx7Az Dcb0mqxnhNmQ7o5YJQlodbrmI3cEbXb0/YeTaX9r2pmxhtz06hekCTa28ZoycspB aCzoWLuZW1et9zNTYQzfDADLPPoLDizHG/zHPpWH97t/8NgQOXmQXS1qccNkylMl LghngUR+2YXlmB0omNLy1e6hQCzjkgUlxYE5T5Aimn0WpTmHk4yn9HwOdGXC2gvU idX5qlQUkwhxuEqOgN/p++tzv22Fi8W3RaIusrMzJV2dU3326IEwsJzFY3UI8xh2 M1bZCWTA6TlBBJoqbugt4gqvhAT0/yH6kJdLjDdYlKsEUVM3nfctfQ== =STNd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

new release of Crowds
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Authentication-Warning: akalice.research.att.com: majordomo set sender to owner-crowds-talk(a)research.att.com using -f Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:28:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Reiter <reiter(a)research.att.com> To: crowds-talk(a)research.att.com Subject: new release of Crowds Sender: owner-crowds-talk(a)research.att.com Precedence: bulk Crowds 1.0.3 is now available. If you already agreed to our license on our web page, there's no need to do it again; just send email to crowds-support(a)research.att.com from the previous email address that you gave us, and we'll send 1.0.3 to you. The main change in 1.0.3 is a configuration file that eliminates the need for command-line arguments to anon.pl, and that also enables us to ship distributions ready to join our crowd (i.e., the registration step is eliminated). Hopefully this will make Crowds easier to use. - Mike --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

2 1

money laundering book review
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

some new books that might be of interest to some cpunks ------- Forwarded Message Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 11:59:12 -0400 From: Kris Millegan RoadsEnd <RoadsEnd(a)AOL.COM> Subject: Fwd: piml] Free Life Commentary - The New World Order To: CTRL(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM - --------------------- Forwarded message: From: ke4yqz(a)mindspring.com (Roger Cravens) To: c-news(a)world.std.com, piml(a)mars.galstar.com Date: 97-09-30 16:54:38 EDT >From: "Chris R. Tame" <Chris(a)rand.demon.co.uk> >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 19:45:58 +0100 >Subject: Free Life Commentary - The New World Order >To: libnw(a)circuit.com (Multiple recipients of Liberty_NW) > >I hope the third issue of my colleague Sean's Free Life Commentary will >prove of interest. > >Chris R. Tame >Director >Libertarian Alliance > > ------- Forwarded message follows ------- > >Free Life Commentary >Editor: Sean Gabb >Issue Number Three >29th September 1997 > >========================== >"Over himself, over his own mind and body, >the individual is sovereign" >(J.S. Mill, On Liberty, 1859) >========================== > >Free Life Commentary is an independent journal of comment, >published on the Internet. To recieve regular issues, send >e-mail to Sean Gabb at old.whig(a)virgin.net > >Issues are archived at http://freespace.virgin.net/old.whig/ > >Contact Address: 25 Chapter Chambers, Esterbrooke Street, >London, SW1P 4NN; Telephone: 0181 858 0841 > >========================== > > On the New World Order: > Two Book Reviews > by Sean Gabb > > > > International Efforts to Combat Money Laundering > William C. Gilmore (ed.) > Grotius Publications Limited, > Cambridge, 1992, 335pp, 48 (pbk) > (ISBN 0 521 46305 X) > > Money Laundering: A Practical Guide to the New >Legislation > Rowan Bosworth-Davies and Graham Saltmarsh > Chapman & Hall, London, 1994, > xii and 304pp, 49.50 (hbk) > (ISBN 0 412 57530 2) > > >The first of these books is a collection of treaties, plus other >documents, concerned with the international fight against >money laundering. The second explains how these treaties >have been enacted into, and are enforced under, the laws of >the United Kingdom. Both works will repay the closest >study. In clear detail, they show the growth of what must >be called a New World Order, and how, without some >interposing cause, this may produce a universal slide into >despotism. > >The fight against money laundering begins with realising >that the "War on Drugs" has been lost. When goods are >portable and easily concealed, and when demand for them is >strong enough to bear almost any cost of bringing them to >market, the main effect of prohibition will be to put a >bounty on crime. For all the efforts of the past three >generations, illegal drugs are available in most high security >prisons. In much of the West, street prices have been >stable or even falling since 1980. > >The official response, however, has not been to give in and >legalise the trade, but to expand the War to a front where >previously there had been few hostilities. While keeping up >their efforts against the trade itself, the authorities have >turned increasingly to confiscating its proceeds. This new >approach has three alleged benefits: > >First, it will deprive criminals of their incentive to enter >and remain in the trade; > >Second, it will allow the punishing of those in charge of the >trade - people who never touch or see illegal drugs, but to >whom the main profits ultimately flow; > >Third, it can make the War on Drugs self-supporting, and >perhaps yield a surplus for other public spending. > >There is, however, one practical difficulty. Before the >authorities can confiscate the money, they must find it. To >do this, they must keep it from being merged beyond recall >into the general flow of investment. This involves ending >bank secrecy and imposing a mass of financial regulation. >Now, most people - especially the rich - dislike having their >lives pried into. Nor do banks like higher costs and >limitations on what business they can do. And so, given >the present freedom of capital markets, no government >acting alone can afford a strict policy of confiscation. It >would, sooner or later, cause a flight of transactions to >more liberal places. > >The solution has been to try making everywhere in the >world equally illiberal. Such was the purpose of the >United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in >Narcotic Drugs and Narcotic Substances, signed in Vienna >in December 1988 [full text in Gilmore, pp.75-97]. This is >one of the most important international treaties of the past >50 years. It not merely requires its signatory states to >criminalise the laundering of drug money, and to confiscate >it where found, but lays down so far as possible a common >wording for the criminal statutes, and a common mode of >enforcement. It also requires full and prompt cooperation >between the signatory states for the enforcement of these >laws anywhere in the world. > >The Convention had little direct or immediate effect on >British law. Many of its requirements, indeed, had already >been met in the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986. Most >others were only met in the Criminal Justice Act 1993, >which enacts the European Community Directive of 1991 >on the Prevention of the Use of the Financial System for the >Purpose of Money Laundering [full text in Gilmore, >pp.250-67]. This itself derives from the Vienna Convention >only through the Council of Europe Convention on >Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the >Proceeds from Crime 1990 [full text in Gilmore, pp.177- >91]. Even so, this country is fast becoming a financial >police state of the kind agreed at Vienna - and where the >process cannot be traced to the Convention, it can be traced >to the same international pressures of which the Convention >is itself a result. > >Let me explain. When I talk about a New World Order, I >do not mean some grand conspiracy of bankers, or Jews, or >Illuminati, or even - with far more probability - the >American Government. There are countries where policy is >largely dictated from outside. But for rich and powerful >countries, the truth is more complex. Most international >obligations imposed on this country, for example, were not >only consented to by our rulers, but were usually proposed >by them, and are enforced by agencies in which our own >countrymen often occupy senior positions. > >Where others see conspiracies, I see public choice >economics. Whenever a government tries to do something >dangerous or unnecessary, like banning drugs or educating >the poor, it must set up an agency through which to spend >the allocated funds. Once employed, the agents will - as if >directed by an invisible hand - start to find more and more >justifications for expanding their status and numbers. They >collect the statistics. They know which ones to publish and >which to hold back. They are the politicians' first and >favoured source of advice. They have their pet journalists. >They trade favours with the relevant interest groups. They >know exactly how to give themselves a pleasing life, and >how to see off threats to it. Unless the money runs out, or >the public turns really nasty, they can write their own >budget cheques. > >By natural extension, the same is now happening at the >international level - though with potentially far worse >consequences. In the first place, there is limitless money: >budgets would need to swell unimaginably large to reach >even one per cent of gross planetary product. In the >second, public anger seldom crosses borders; and, if all else >fails, the politicians and bureaucrats in one country can >shelter behind the excuse of treaty obligations that cannot be >unilaterally be cast off - not, at least, without consequences >more horrible than words exist to describe. Third, the >enforcement of international treaties means the growth of >what is in effect an international bureaucracy. The local >enforcers of a treaty may be citizens of the signatory states, >who will live and work in their home countries, and may >even occupy positions in the domestic administration. Yet >these are people who, by virtue of the agreements they >enforce, and the contacts they make and maintain in other >countries, are members of an international order. And, in >at least the case of money laundering, they will share an >agenda that is often deeply hostile to their native >institutions. > >This can be seen - expressed with almost naive honesty - in >the book by Messrs Bosworth-Davies and Saltmarsh. Both >are British police officers: the latter is a departmental head >at the National Criminal Intelligence Service. Both take it >for granted that the world needs an international police >force. Both are unable to believe that anyone can >disinterestedly object to the necessary harmonisations of >law, and the corresponding abolition of Common Law >protections. They "know one senior clearing banker who >has described this [money laundering] legislation as the >nearest thing he has experienced to >'McCarthyism'...".[p.172] Of course, they see things >differently. The legislation > > discloses, on mature reflection, a set of carefully > structured laws which, with good will, due > diligence and a modicum of responsible attention > from the industry as a whole, should not prove > too burdensome. Indeed, the authors believe that > some of the regulatory requirements have been > diluted too much already, in a misguided attempt > to placate the sensibilities of certain sectors of the > industry....[Ibid.] > >With people like this advising the politicians and lecturing >the rest of us, little wonder the Drug Trafficking Offences >Act predates the Vienna Convention by two years! Though >they will hotly disagree - and even perhaps consider a libel >writ - Messrs Bosworth-Davies and Saltmarsh cannot be >regarded as our countrymen. More at home in a gathering >of Bulgarian or Filipino police chiefs than with any of us, >they are foreigners with British passports. > >Somewhat less honest, though still interesting, is the >Explanatory Report of the Committee of Experts who >drafted the Council of Europe Convention [full text in >Gilmore, pp.192-237]. Though formally subordinate to a >committee of the various European Ministers of Justice, >these experts plainly saw their first duty as lying elsewhere. >Call it "the international community" or their own order, >their duty was collective and not to any single country. > >Look at their dislike of the narrow focus of the Vienna >Convention. They wanted something that would also allow >confiscation for > > terrorist offences, organised crime, violent crimes, > offences involving the sexual exploitation of > children and young persons, extortion, > kidnapping, environmental offences, economic > fraud, insider trading and other serious offences. > [Gilmore, p.204] > >But they had to concede that not every European country >might like its own laws against these acts to be written by >an international committee. And so they allowed each >signatory state to reserve whatever of these acts to its own >legislative process. > > The experts agreed, however, that such states > should review their legislation periodically and > expand the applicability of confiscation measures, > in order to be able to restrict the reservations > subsequently as much as possible. [Ibid.] > >And this is only the beginning. As yet, the shape of world >government exists barely in outline. But the tendency ought >to be plain. Power is moving from national - and mostly >democratic - governments to unaccountable and even >invisible bureaucracies. Liberal institutions that are often >the work of ages are being hammered into the transmitters >of unlimited power. We are beginning to known how >people in the Greek city states felt after absorption into the >Roman Empire. > >When the American militiamen cry out that the United >Nations is about to invade in black helicopters and plant >microcomputers in their bottoms, I am at least sceptical. >This is not the New World Order that I see. What I do see >is actually worse. We can shoot the helicopters down, and >dig out the microcomputers, and put the ringleaders on >trial. We can go about playing the hero of our choice from >Star Wars. But in the real world, there is no Death Star to >blow up - no Darth Vadar to push into the void. There is >just a huge, elastic network of people, all acting in what >they believe is the public good, most with some degree of >public support. > >How this kind of despotism can be resisted is another >question, and I have said enough already. But I will repeat >- the books here reviewed do repay a very close study. At >the very least, it is useful to see the enemy's future plan >laid out in such detail. > >Sean Gabb > >========================== >If you like Free Life Commentary, you may also care to >subscribe to my longer, hard copy journal: > >Free Life >The Libertarian Alliance >25 Chapter Chambers >London SW1P 4NN > >A 10 Pound subscription buys you four issues. > >========================== >Legal Notice: Though using the name Free Life, this >journal is owned by me and not by the Libertarian Alliance, >which in consequence bears no liability of whatever kind >for the contents. >-- >Sean Gabb | "Over himself, over his own | >E-mail: old.whig(a)virgin.net | mind and body, the individual| >Web Page: | is sovereign" | >http://freespace.virgin.net/old.whig/ | J.S. Mill, On Liberty, 1859 | > >-- >Chris R. Tame, Director >Libertarian Alliance | "The secret of Happiness is Freedom, | >25 Chapter Chambers | and the secret of Freedom is Courage" | >Esterbrooke Street | Thucydides, Pericles' Funeral Oration | >London SW1P 4NN >England >Tel: 0171 821 5502 >Fax: 0171 834 2031 >Email: chris(a)rand.demon.co.uk >LA Web Site: http://www.digiweb.com/igeldard/LA/ >Free Life Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/old.whig > > >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >LIBERTY NORTHWEST CONFERENCE Fidonet 1:346/16 (208) 267-9851 >"The only libertarian-oriented political discussion conference on >the Fidonet Backbone..." SysOps AREAFIX: LIB_NW >Visit Liberty Northwest on the Web: http://www.saldivar.com/lib_nw/ >Subscribe: libnw-on(a)circuit.com -- Unsubscribe: libnw-off(a)circuit.com > >...Liberty is never an option... only a condition to be lost >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ******************************************************************** * Liberty is NEVER an option ... only a condition to be lost! * * http://www.jbs.org * ******************************************************************** * Roger Cravens, SYSOP * * South East Signals Intelligence Group BBS: (770-) 942-1089 * * Atlanta, GA * ******************************************************************** * Signals Intelligence: "... and the truth will set you free"! * ******************************************************************** ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Re: Encrypting Pagers is Easy! [Overview, technical tradeoffs, crypto]
by Gold Dot 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Y'all: Since I design pagers for a living, I thought I might comment on encryption in pagers. I've been thinking about encryption in pagers for several years now. RC4 was suggested, and it is probably a good choice for the low end microcontrollers used in pagers. The problem with encryption in pagers is not algorithms, hardware, software or even technology. The problem is getting awareness that there is a problem transmitting pages in the clear. Most people have no clue and I've seen not one request from a customer (meaning large paging companies) for encrypted pagers. A few more well-publisized hacks will help, though. Code space is at a premium in a pager, so widespread awareness of the inherent insecurity of paging protocols will be necessary to get encryption into the products. So, here's a project for any hacker with time on their hands. Input the audio signal from a garden variety scanner into your sound card (just about any variety will do) and decode the signal. It's just 4 level FM. I'd do it myself, but I value my job. :-) Or, if you're lazy and have money, buy yourself a SignalPro and decode two channels simulaneously. Then, scan paging systems in strategic locations and post the juicy tidbits to the 'net. TTFN, Gold Dot golddot(a)nym.alias.net "Gold is money, and nothing else is." -- some dead guy

1 0

index.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN logo Navigation Infoseek/Big Yellow Pathfinder/Warner Bros Main banner Price Waterhouse rule DOOR-TO-DOOR SCHOOL SALES DEBATED AFTER BOY'S SLAYING Werner October 1, 1997 Web posted at: 10:02 p.m. EDT (0202 GMT) TOMS RIVER, New Jersey (CNN) -- During the school year, it's a scene that takes place across the United States -- children selling merchandise door-to-door, raising money to benefit their schools or activity groups. But now, the rape and murder of an 11-year-old New Jersey boy who tragically knocked on the wrong door has brought renewed attention to the issue of whether door-to-door sales should be discouraged, or even outlawed. Prosecutors say Edward Werner was attacked and murdered by a 15-year-old boy who opened the door at a house in Toms River. Edward hoped to win a walkie talkie by selling the most merchandise in a contest. Authorities say they know of no other connection between the victim and the teen who has been charged -- that it was a "chance encounter" brought about by Edward's door-to-door selling in what a prosecutor describes as a "very safe" neighborhood. The teen-ager was charged Wednesday with murder and aggravated sexual assault. Authorities did not release his name because he is a juvenile. Raising money for the PTA Schools and non-profit groups pull down an estimated $2 billion a year from product sales, and no state has a law restricting door-to-door fund-raising sales by school children. But in the wake of Edward's slaying, a New Jersey legislator has suggested a ban. Neighborhood Ironically, Edward was raising money for the PTA -- though the national Parent Teacher Association has a policy discouraging students from selling merchandise door-to-door. The sales kits provided to the students warned them to sell only to "family, friends and neighbors with whom you are familiar." The Association of Fund Raisers and Direct Sellers, a trade group representing about half of the estimated 1,500 companies that deal with school and youth groups, has also adopted a policy saying it does not endorse door-to-door sales. Instead, the association suggests that children sell to relatives, friends or neighbors they know, while having parents sell to their co-workers, according to Russell Lemieux, the association's executive director. "That's really the bulk of sales in fund raising," Lemieux said. "The instance of a child going door-to-door is quite rare." However, children are often offered incentives that encourage them to sell as much as they can -- incentives which could have a tendency to encourage, rather than discourage, door-to-door sales. "Our members say incentives ... make a big difference," Lemieux said. Robbery thought the motive When he was last seen, Edward had about $200 on him, and police say he had been showing that money to friends. Robbery is believed to have been a motive in his murder, but no robbery charge has been filed. In the wake of the tragedy Edward's school district has banned door-to-door sales, as green ribbons have begun to appear in his memory. Correspondent Christine Negroni contributed to this report. _________________________________________________________________ Infoseek search ____________________ ____ ____ _________________________________________________________________ rule Message Boards Sound off on our message boards You said it... [INLINE] Price Waterhouse rule To the top © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

1 0

Secure HTTP servers.
by Jim 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, I just started working vfor a local ISP and they found out, i was on this list and knew a little about crypto. Anyway they seem to have the impression this would qualify me to know something. At any rate, on to the point of the mail. Could someone point me in the right direction for info on secure http servers ?? Also maybe info on which is better than the other ?? Jason

6 7